↓ Skip to main content

SAGE Publishing

Restoring Motor Functions After Stroke: Multiple Approaches and Opportunities

Overview of attention for article published in The Neuroscientist, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
64 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
234 Mendeley
Title
Restoring Motor Functions After Stroke: Multiple Approaches and Opportunities
Published in
The Neuroscientist, November 2017
DOI 10.1177/1073858417737486
Pubmed ID
Authors

Estelle Raffin, Friedhelm C. Hummel

Abstract

More than 1.5 million people suffer a stroke in Europe per year and more than 70% of stroke survivors experience limited functional recovery of their upper limb, resulting in diminished quality of life. Therefore, interventions to address upper-limb impairment are a priority for stroke survivors and clinicians. While a significant body of evidence supports the use of conventional treatments, such as intensive motor training or constraint-induced movement therapy, the limited and heterogeneous improvements they allow are, for most patients, usually not sufficient to return to full autonomy. Various innovative neurorehabilitation strategies are emerging in order to enhance beneficial plasticity and improve motor recovery. Among them, robotic technologies, brain-computer interfaces, or noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) are showing encouraging results. These innovative interventions, such as NIBS, will only provide maximized effects, if the field moves away from the "one-fits all" approach toward a "patient-tailored" approach. After summarizing the most commonly used rehabilitation approaches, we will focus on NIBS and highlight the factors that limit its widespread use in clinical settings. Subsequently, we will propose potential biomarkers that might help to stratify stroke patients in order to identify the individualized optimal therapy. We will discuss future methodological developments, which could open new avenues for poststroke rehabilitation, toward more patient-tailored precision medicine approaches and pathophysiologically motivated strategies.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 234 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 234 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 32 14%
Researcher 29 12%
Student > Master 28 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 27 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 4%
Other 33 14%
Unknown 75 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 32 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 31 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 24 10%
Engineering 18 8%
Psychology 12 5%
Other 26 11%
Unknown 91 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 January 2022.
All research outputs
#3,931,651
of 22,925,760 outputs
Outputs from The Neuroscientist
#240
of 721 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#72,253
of 330,793 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Neuroscientist
#2
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,925,760 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 721 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 330,793 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 6 of them.